Adherence to insulin treatment in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetic patients initiated on different insulin regimens

Addressing the Burden of Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Type 2 Diabetes with Insulin Pump Technology: A Narrative Review

The growing prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains a leading health concern in the US. Despite new medications and technologies, glycemic control in this population remains suboptimal, which increases the risk of poor outcomes, increased healthcare resource utilization, and associated costs. This article reviews the clinical and economic impacts of suboptimal glycemic control in patients on basal-bolus insulin or multiple daily injections (MDI) and discusses how new technologies, such as tubeless insulin delivery devices, referred to as "patch pumps", have the potential to improve outcomes in patients with T2D.

Insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: Insights into clinical efficacy, patient-reported outcomes, and adherence challenges

Insulin therapy plays a crucial role in the management of type 2 diabetes as the disease progresses. Over the past century, insulin formulations have undergone significant modifications and bioengineering, resulting in a diverse range of available insulin products. These products show distinct pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles. Consequently, various insulin regimens have em-erged for the management of type 2 diabetes, including premixed formulations and combinations of basal and bolus insulins. The utilization of different insulin regimens yields disparate clinical outcomes, adverse events, and, notably, patient-reported outcomes (PROs). PROs provide valuable insights from the patient's perspective, serving as a valuable mine of information for enhancing healthcare and informing clinical decisions. Adherence to insulin therapy, a critical patient-reported outcome, significantly affects clinical outcomes and is influenced by multiple factors. This review provides insights into the clinical effectiveness of various insulin preparations, PROs, and factors impacting insulin therapy adherence, with the aim of enhancing healthcare practices and informing clinical decisions for individuals with type 2 diabetes.

What Is the Role of Basal Weekly Insulin in Clinical Practice? The State of the Art

Despite the advent of innovative therapies in the treatment of diabetes, ever-increasing awareness is still directed to the role of insulin since it has continued to be at the centre of diabetes therapy for decades, as a therapeutic integration of innovative agents in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), as the only replacement therapy in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and also in gestational diabetes. In this context, the study of molecules such as weekly basal insulins, both for their technological and pharmacodynamic innovation and their manageability and undoubted benefits in compliance with drug therapy, can only be a turning point in diabetes and for all its phenotypes. This review aims to provide insight into the knowledge of basal weekly insulins and their use in type 1 and 2 diabetes mellitus by examining their safety, efficacy, manageability and increased therapeutic compliance.

Development and Validation of USM-Insulin Adherence Module for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Background

Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not achieve the desired glycaemic control despite being treated with insulin. Studies found this due to an improper understanding of insulin function, its intensification process and patients' negative perspective on insulin. We developed an education module to enhance adherence to insulin therapy.

Methods

This study applied a mixed design. It was conducted in three phases: i) Phase I: literature search and focus group discussions (FGDs), ii) Phase II: module development and iii) Phase III: content and face validation of Universiti Sains Malaysia-Insulin Adherence Module (USM-IAM). FGDs were used to gather patients' opinions. All researchers repeatedly discussed about the module content and arrangement, the words and images used, and the grammar in producing the final draft. Specialists and target audience performed content and face validation of the module.

Results

Thirty-six participants were involved in the FGDs. Data saturation was achieved at the 4th FGD. Three themes emerged from qualitative data analysis and were incorporated into the module. USM-IAM was finalised with five units. The content validity index (CVI) was 0.92, while face validity agreements were between 86% and 97%.

Conclusion

The CVI and face agreement for USM-IAM exceed the cut-off point for a sound module. It has good potential to be used as a resource for educating patients in enhancing insulin adherence.

The prevalence of adherence to insulin therapy in patients with diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adherence to insulin therapy is crucial to achieving good glycemic control for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). A comprehensive estimation of adherence to insulin therapy in patients with diabetes is currently lacking.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the prevalence of adherence to insulin therapy in patients with both T1D and T2D.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ProQuest Dissertation and Theses from the inception of each database to August 2023. Cross-sectional studies were included if they met the following criteria: (1) conducted in patients with T1D or T2D; (2) reported adherence to insulin therapy. The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist for studies reporting prevalence data was used to assess the quality of included studies. Pooled estimates of the prevalence of adherence to insulin were calculated as a percentage together with a 95 % confidence interval (95%CI) using a random-effect model. All analyses were conducted using STATA 15 (College Station, Texas, United States); PROSPERO (CRD42022322323).

RESULTS

Search results yielded 14,914 articles, of these 57 studies with a total of 125,241 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall estimated prevalence of adherence to insulin therapy in both types of diabetes was 55.37 % (95%CI: 48.55 %-62.19 %). The adherence for T1D was 52.63 % (95 % CI: 37.37 %-67.87 %), whereas the adherence for T2D was 52.55 % (95 % CI: 43.08 %-62.01 %). The prevalence of adherence in lower middle-income countries was 56.79 % (95 % CI: 27.85 %-85.74 %).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall prevalence of adherence to insulin therapy was remarkably low. This requires attention from healthcare practitioners and policymakers to implement appropriate strategic approaches to improve adherence to insulin therapy.

Evaluating Patient and Provider Preferences for a Once-Weekly Basal Insulin in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

Purpose

The global burden of disease of type 2 diabetes (T2D) is significant, and insulin currently plays a central role in T2D management. This study sought to assess the preferences of patients with T2D and healthcare providers (HCPs) involved in T2D care regarding a hypothetical once-weekly basal insulin in comparison to current basal insulin options.

Patients and Methods

In a survey-based study in the United States that included a discrete choice experiment (DCE), patients with T2D (insulin naïve and current insulin users) and providers who treat individuals with T2D were asked to evaluate current basal insulins and identify attributes of importance regarding a hypothetical once-weekly basal insulin. A regression analysis was conducted to identify drivers of preference by relevant demographics, attitudes, and behaviors.

Results

Most respondents (91% of patients with T2D and 89% of HCPs in the base case scenario) would choose a once-weekly basal insulin product over another type of basal insulin. Both patients with T2D and HCPs rated insulin type and delivery method to be attributes of highest importance in the discrete choice exercise. Current basal insulin users ("insulin experienced") reported higher levels of confidence that a once-weekly insulin would help them to achieve their desired blood sugar levels compared to their current basal insulin (5.7 vs 5.2 on a 7-point Likert scale). Most insulin-experienced respondents (88%) were likely to inquire about once-weekly basal insulin, and most HCPs (85%) indicated willingness to educate patients on management of their T2D using a once-weekly basal insulin.

Conclusion

Discussing preferences for T2D medication management is important for patients and HCPs to ensure treatments are offered for patients based on their preferences. This study showed that patient and provider preferences are similar towards a once-weekly basal insulin over current basal insulin preparations.

A Three-Step Data-Driven Methodology to Assess Adherence to Basal Insulin Therapy in Patients With Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

While health care providers (HCPs) are generally aware of the challenges concerning insulin adherence in adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D), data guiding identification of insulin nonadherence and understanding of injection patterns have been limited. Hence, the aim of this study was to examine detailed injection data and provide methods for assessing different aspects of basal insulin adherence.

METHOD

Basal insulin data recorded by a connected insulin pen and prescribed doses were collected from 103 insulin-treated patients (aged ≥18 years) with T2D from an ongoing clinical trial (NCT04981808). We categorized the data and analyzed distributions of correct doses, increased doses, reduced doses, and missed doses to quantify adherence. We developed a three-step model evaluating three aspects of adherence (overall adherence, adherence distribution, and dose deviation) offering HCPs a comprehensive assessment approach.

RESULTS

We used data from a connected insulin pen to exemplify the use of the three-step model to evaluate overall, adherence, adherence distribution, and dose deviation using patient cases.

CONCLUSION

The methodology provides HCPs with detailed access to previously limited clinical data on insulin administration, making it possible to identify specific nonadherence behavior which will guide patient-HCP discussions and potentially provide valuable insights for tailoring the most appropriate forms of support.

Factors associated with adherence or nonadherence to insulin therapy among adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A scoping review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

One of the greatest barriers to the treatment of T2DM is nonadherence which particularly applies to insulin therapy. There is a need for a comprehensive overview of all factors associated with nonadherence to insulin therapy. The aim of this study was to identify factors associated with adherence or nonadherence to insulin therapy among adults with T2DM.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement. A systematic search was performed in PubMed, Cinahl, and Web of Science (January 2013 to March 2023).

RESULTS

A final sample of 48 studies was included in the scoping review. The synthesis revealed 30 factors associated with adherence or nonadherence. The factors were grouped into 6 themes: demographics, attitude and perceptions, management of diabetes, impact on daily living, disease and medication, and healthcare system.

CONCLUSION

The most prominent factors identified were age, cost of healthcare, personal beliefs towards insulin therapy, social stigma, patient education, complexity of diabetes treatment, impact of insulin therapy on daily life, and fear of side effects. The results indicate a need for further research to determine threshold values for the factors associated with adherence or nonadherence.

The psychometric properties of the barriers to insulin treatment questionnaire in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using insulin

Aim

The objective of this study was to translate the Barriers to Insulin Treatment Questionnaire (BIT) into Chinese and test its psychometric properties in middle-aged and elderly type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) patients using insulin in the Han people of urban China.

Methods

We established the Barriers to Insulin Treatment Questionnaire in Chinese (BIT-C). We selected 296 patients with T2D for testing BIT-C's the reliability and validity, of which 120 patients were retested four weeks later. Another 200 patients with T2D were selected to perform the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).

Results

The final BIT-C consisted of 11 items (BIT-C-11) and four factors. The explained variances of the BIT-C-11 and its four factors were 90.153%, 51.308%, 18.810%, 10.863%, and 9.173%. CFA validated that the four-factor model fit with the data of the BIT-C-11. Standardized factor loadings ranged between 0.77 and 0.90. The Cronbach's α coefficients of the BIT-C-11 and its four factors were 0.903, 0.952, 0.927, 0.938, and 0.917. Correlation analysis was performed between the BIT-C-11 and General Adherence Scale in Chinese (GAS-C) to calculate the criterion-related validity (r = 0.598, p < 0.001). The correlation coefficient r of the BIT-C-11's test-retest reliability was 0.810 (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

The BIT-C-11 has good reliability and validity. It can be used for psychological resistance to insulin therapy studies of middle-aged and elderly patients with T2D using insulin in the Han people of Chinese cities.

Assessment of Adherence to Insulin Injections among Diabetic Patients on Basal-Bolus Regimen in Primary and Secondary Healthcare Centers in Al-Jouf Region of Saudi Arabia; A Descriptive Analysis

BACKGROUND

Patient adherence to insulin therapy is one of the major challenges during the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Considering the dearth of investigations, this study aimed to determine the adherence pattern and factors linked with nonadherence among diabetic patients using insulin in Al-Jouf region of Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study included diabetic patients using basal-bolus regimens, whether they had type 1 or type 2 diabetes. This study's objective was determined using a validated data collection form that included sections on demographics, reasons for missed insulin doses, list of barriers to therapy, difficulties during insulin administration, and factors that may improve insulin inaction adherence.

RESULTS

Of 415 diabetic patients, 169 (40.7%) were reported to forget doses of insulin every week. The majority of these patients (38.5%) forget one or two doses. Away from home (36,1%), inability to adhere to the diet (24.3%) and embarrassment to administer injections in public (23.7%) were frequently cited as reasons for missing insulin doses. The occurrence of hypoglycemia (31%), weight gain (26%), and needle phobia (22%) were frequently cited as obstacles to insulin injection use. Preparing injections (18.3%), using insulin at bedtime (18.3%), and storing insulin at a cold temperature (18.1%) were the most challenging aspects of insulin use for patients. Reduction in the number of injections (30.8%) and convenient timing for insulin administration (29.6%) were frequently cited as factors that may improve participant adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed that the majority of diabetic patients forget to inject insulin, primarily as a result of travel. By identifying potential obstacles faced by patients, these findings direct health authorities to design and implement initiatives to increase insulin adherence among patients.

Patient perceptions of insulin therapy in diabetes self-management with insulin injection devices

AIMS

Several insulin delivery systems are available to control glycemia in patients with diabetes. Recently introduced devices feature connectivity enabling data transfer to smartphone applications to provide decision support and reduce errors in dosing and timing, while reducing the cognitive burden.

METHODS

We conducted an online survey in Italian patients with a self-reported diagnosis of diabetes to assess patient perceptions of insulin therapy management, and their impressions of connection-enabled insulin pens compared to standard insulin pens. The Morisky Medication Adherence Scale-8 was used to assess adherence to insulin therapy.

RESULTS

Among 223 respondents (108 with type 1 diabetes; 115 with type 2 diabetes), the most prominent unmet need was the necessity to overcome the cognitive burden of care associated with measuring, calculating, timing, and recording therapy. Only 25% of respondents had high adherence; 28% had low adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

When asked to compare the attributes of a non-connected insulin pen with those of a new connected device, 71% of patients rated the new proposal "very useful". The cognitive burden associated with self-management of diabetes therapy may influence preferences for advanced insulin delivery systems.

Patients' Preferences for Connected Insulin Pens: A Discrete Choice Experiment Among Patients with Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

This study quantified how people with diabetes value the unique features of connected insulin pens and related mobile apps, and the underlying reasons for preferring connected versus non-connected insulin pens.

METHODS

A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was conducted in the USA and UK to elicit preferences of adults (≥ 18 years) with type 1 or 2 diabetes for attributes of insulin pens. Attributes included device type, dosing support, glucose monitoring, additional app features, and data sharing. Relative attribute importance (RAI) scores were calculated to capture the relative importance of an attribute. Predicted choice probabilities were obtained to compare different profiles for connected and non-connected insulin pens.

RESULTS

The DCE was completed by 540 participants (58.9% male; 90.7% Caucasian; mean age, 58.3 years; 69.4% type 2 diabetes). Participants most valued the possibility of using a connected insulin pen with dosing support and automated dose logging (RAI = 39.9%), followed by automatic transfer of glucose levels (RAI = 29.0%), additional features of tracking diet and physical activity (RAI = 14.6%), data sharing (RAI = 13.6%), and device type (RAI = 2.9%). All profiles of connected insulin pens were preferred over a non-connected pen (p < 0.001), and pen profiles with advanced features were preferred over those without (p < 0.001). Preferences differed by age but not diabetes type, country of residence, or insulin regimen.

CONCLUSION

People with diabetes in the USA and UK prefer connected over non-connected insulin pens due largely to the availability of automated logging of dose and glucose levels.

Adherence and Persistence to Insulin Therapy in People with Diabetes: Impact of Connected Insulin Pen Delivery Ecosystem

Diabetes is an increasing public health problem, and insulin is the mainstay for treatment of type 1 diabetes. In type 2 diabetes treatment, insulin therapy is used after oral or other injectable agents become inadequate to achieve glycemic control. Despite the advances in insulin therapy, management of diabetes remains challenging. Numerous studies have reported low adherence and persistence to insulin therapy, which acts as a barrier to successful glycemic control and diabetes management. The aim of this targeted review article is to provide an overview of adherence and persistence to insulin therapy in people with diabetes and to discuss the impact of the emergence of a new connected ecosystem of increasingly sophisticated insulin pens, glucose monitoring systems, telemedicine, and mHealth on diabetes management. With the emergence of a connected diabetes ecosystem, we have entered an era of advanced personalized insulin delivery, which will have the potential to enhance diabetes self-management and clinical management. Early systems promise to unlock the potential to address missed or late bolus insulin delivery, which should help to address non-adherence and non-persistence. Over time, improvements in this ecosystem have the potential to combine insulin data with previously missing contextualized patient data, including meal, glucose, and activity data to support personalized clinical decisions and ultimately revolutionize insulin therapy.

Effects of basal and premixed insulin on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patients based on multicenter prospective real-world data

BACKGROUND

To investigate the different efficacies of glycemic control between basal and premixed insulin in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) when non-insulin medications fail to reach treatment targets.

METHODS

This was a prospective, large-scale, real-world study at 10 diabetes centers in China. Between June 2017 and June 2021, we enrolled 1104 T2DM participants initiated with either once-daily basal insulin or twice-daily premixed insulin when the glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) control target was not met after at least two non-insulin agents were administered. A Cox proportional hazards regression model adjusting for multiple influencing factors was performed to compare the different effects of basal and premixed insulin on reaching the HbA1c control target.

RESULTS

At baseline, basal insulin (57.3%) was prescribed more frequently than premixed insulin (42.7%). Patients with a higher body mass index (BMI) or higher HbA1c levels were more likely to receive premixed insulin than basal insulin (both p < 0.001). After a median follow-up of 12.0 months, compared to those with premixed insulin, the hazard ratio for reaching the HbA1c target to those with basal insulin was 1.10 (95% CI, 0.92-1.31; p = 0.29) after adjustment, and less weight gain was observed in those with basal insulin than with premixed insulin (percentage change of BMI from baseline -0.37[5.50]% vs 3.40[6.73]%, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, once-daily basal insulin was more frequently prescribed and had similar glycemic control effects but less weight gain compared with twice-daily premixed insulin when used as initiation therapy for those in whom glycemic control with non-insulin medications failed.

Insulin Adherence and Associated Factors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated in Klang Primary Health Care Centres

Background

Insulin therapy is necessary for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to reach the targeted glycaemic level and prevent complications. This study aimed to determine the proportion of adherence to insulin therapy and the associated factors in patients with T2DM.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted among 249 patients with T2DM who had been on insulin therapy for at least 2 months in primary care centres of the Ministry of Health in Klang, Malaysia. A validated insulin adherence questionnaire for diabetes mellitus (DM) was used to assess insulin adherence. Data on the sociodemographic characteristics, disease-related factors, treatment-related factors and clinical parameters were extracted from medical records and interviews with patients.

Results

The adherence to insulin therapy was 8.43%. The factors associated with insulin adherence were self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 5.39; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.20, 24.13; P = 0.028), exercise (AOR: 3.38; 95% CI: 1.37, 10.03; P = 0.029) and the number of daily insulin injections (AOR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.44; P = 0.017).

Conclusion

The adherence to insulin therapy in primary health care centres in Malaysia was very poor. Patients who practiced SMBG, exercised and frequent daily insulin injections were significantly more adherent to insulin therapy.

Where to Initiate Basal Insulin Therapy: Inpatient or Outpatient Department? Real-World Observation in China

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of initiating insulin therapy in inpatient and outpatient settings during a 6-month follow-up period among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in real-world settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was based on the ORBIT study, a real-world observational study which recruited patients with inadequate glycemic control by oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD) and initiated basal insulin (BI). We compare difference in initiation and evolution of insulin therapy and glycemic control after six months were compared between patients initiating basal insulin in the inpatient department (inpatient initiators) and those starting in outpatient (outpatient initiators) among participants without rehospitalization during the six months follow-up.

RESULTS

Among all 18,995 participants in the ORBIT study, 56.0% were inpatient initiators and 44.0% outpatient. We conducted in-depth analysis among 14,860 patients without rehospitalization, 8129 inpatient initiators and 6731 outpatient initiators. (1) Inpatient initiators had lower insulin therapy persistence during six months (64.2%) than outpatient ones (78.6%) (p<0.001), which was mainly explained by more therapy switches from basal-bolus regimen to other therapies among inpatient initiators (50.1%) than that among outpatient initiators (37.5%) (p<0.001). (2) Inpatient initiation had a higher proportion of people achieving glucose targets (HbA1c <7%) than outpatient initiation. However, the benefit of inpatient initiation versus outpatient initiation was mainly observed among patients persisting with the initial insulin therapies (46.3% vs 39.5% p<0.001), rather than those nonpersistent (37.3% vs 36.2%, p=0.723). (3) Among patients with HbA1c <9%, taking only one OAD and without complications at baseline, inpatient insulin initiation did not show a higher proportion of people achieving glucose target than outpatient initiation (adjusted odds ratio=0.96, 95% CI: 0.76-1.21).

CONCLUSION

For patients with HbA1c ≥9%, who were taking more than one OAD and had complications at baseline, initiating insulin treatment during hospitalization has a higher proportion of people achieving glucose target than that in the outpatient department, but the premise is that the initial therapy is acceptable and can be maintained after discharge. Patient-centered approach with co-agreed decision-making to select a suitable insulin regimen should be strengthened.

Basal weekly insulins: the way of the future!

Basal insulin treatment is indispensable for patients with type 1 diabetes and often required by many with type 2 diabetes. Incremental advances lengthening the duration of action of insulin analogs and reducing pharmacodynamic variability have resulted in truly once-daily, long-acting basal insulin analogs. In the quest for better basal insulins to facilitate improvements in glycemic control and long-term outcomes, the driving need is to remove barriers delaying timely initiation of basal insulin, to maximize treatment adherence and persistence and reduce treatment burden without increasing risk of hypoglycemia. We review the range of investigational once-weekly insulins and their molecular strategies and profiles. Currently, the two most advanced clinical development programs are: (1) basal insulin icodec, an insulin analog acylated with a C20 fatty diacid (icosanedioic acid) side chain (Novo Nordisk) and (2) basal insulin Fc, a fusion protein that combines a single-chain insulin variant with a human immunoglobulin G fragment crystallizable domain (Eli Lilly). Available phase 2 data for these two once-weekly agents show comparable glycemic control to existing once-daily insulin analogs, with no greater risk of hypoglycemia. While phase 3 data are awaited to confirm efficacy and safety, we provide future clinical perspectives on practical considerations for the potential use of once-weekly insulins.

Overcoming Barriers to Injectable Therapies: Development of the ORBIT Intervention Within a Behavioural Change Framework

It is estimated among individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) requiring injectable therapies to achieve optimal glycaemic control, one-third are reluctant to initiate therapies, with approximately 80% choosing to discontinue or interrupt injectable regimens soon after commencement. Initiation of injectables is a complex issue, with effectiveness of such treatments undermined by non-adherence or poor engagement. Poor engagement and adherence are attributed to psychological aspects such as individuals’ negative perceptions of injectables, depression, anxiety, feelings of shame, distress and perceived lack of control over their condition. The aim of this study was to describe the development of a structured diabetes intervention to address psychological barriers to injectable treatments among a cohort of those with T2D; conducted within a behavioural change framework. An evidence base was developed to inform on key psychological barriers to injectable therapies. A systematic review highlighted the need for theory-based, structured diabetes education focussed on associated psychological constructs to inform effective, patient-centric provisions to improve injectable initiation and persistence. Findings from the focus groups with individuals who had recently commenced injectable therapies, identified patient-centric barriers to initiation and persistence with injectables. Findings from the systematic review and focus groups were translated via Behavioural Change Wheel (BCW) framework to develop an intervention for people with T2D transitioning to injectable therapies: Overcoming and Removing Barriers to Injectable Treatment in T2D (ORBIT). This article describes how psychological barriers informed the intervention with these mapped onto relevant components, intervention functions and selected behaviour change techniques, and finally aligned with behaviour change techniques. This article outlines the systematic approach to intervention development within the BCW framework; guiding readers through the practical application of each stage. The use of the BCW framework has ensured the development of the intervention is theory driven, with the research able to be evaluated and validated through replication due to the clarity around processes and tasks completed at each stage.

Missed and Mistimed Insulin Doses in People with Diabetes: A Systematic Literature Review

Background: Development of coordinated management approaches is important to facilitate self-care in people with diabetes (PwD). Gaining a better understanding of suboptimal insulin use is key in this endeavor. This review aimed, for the first time, to systematically identify and narratively summarize real-world evidence on the extent of suboptimal insulin use (missed and mistimed insulin) in PwD. Methods: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews identified studies reporting on missed and mistimed insulin dosing. Results: From 3305 studies, 37 publications reporting on 30 unique studies that involved 58,617 PwD were included. Studies were conducted across 12 different countries and most employed cross-sectional surveys. Observations regarding missed and mistimed insulin doses were reported in 25 and 10 studies, respectively. PwD reported missing insulin doses, but rates varied due to differences in reporting methods, participant populations, and insulin regimens. The association between missed dosing and glycemic control was evaluated in ten studies in which the authors reported lower glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels in PwD who did not omit insulin. The proportion of PwD reporting mistiming of insulin was in the range of 20-45%, depending on the study; this was associated with higher rates of hypoglycemia and higher HbA1c as reported by study authors. Reasons for suboptimal insulin use were multifactorial, occurring due to disrupted daily routines, social situations, and hypoglycemia avoidance. Conclusions: This review suggests that suboptimal insulin use is widespread and that PwD using insulin may still be struggling with disease management. There is an unmet need for better integrated support in managing the complexities of insulin therapy and for the development of systems (e.g. digital solutions) that empower people to take control of insulin-treated diabetes.

Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes With the V-Go Wearable Insulin Delivery Device in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Uncontrolled type 2 diabetes can lead to a multitude of health complications. Insulin therapy is recommended when patients are unable to reach their A1C goal with oral or noninsulin injectable diabetes medications. This study evaluated the clinical benefits of switching from multiple daily insulin injections to a wearable insulin delivery device (V-Go). A retrospective chart review was conducted on 44 patients who received prescriptions for the V-Go at two family medicine offices. Investigators found a significant reduction in A1C and daily insulin requirements with no impact on weight or BMI.

Persistence of GLP-1 RA in combination with basal insulin among adults with type 2 diabetes in Canada

AIMS

The purpose of this study is to assess the persistence of Canadians with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) on loose-dose combination treatment (i.e., administered by separate devices) with a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) and basal insulin over 12 months.

METHODS

This study is a retrospective cohort study of T2D adults using a Canadian longitudinal prescription database over a 5-year period. Cohort 1 (n = 12,411) is a primary cohort including only individuals inexperienced with the combination therapy at index. Cohort 2 (n = 13,498) is an exploratory cohort and includes everyone regardless of previous experience on the loose-dose combination therapy. The primary endpoint is the proportion of individuals persistent and average days persistent to the loose-dose combination therapy at 12 months in Canada.

RESULTS

In Cohort 1, overall persistence was 47% in the 12-month period post-index. Persistence is similar when including all inexperienced and subsequent loose-dose combination experiences in Cohort 2 (45%).

CONCLUSIONS

Canadian T2D adults taking a loose-dose combination therapy of a GLP-1 RA and basal insulin had overall low persistence and lower than reports from previous studies of GLP-1 RA or basal insulin alone. Improving persistence to combination therapy with GLP-1 RA plus basal insulin is an important issue to explore in clinical practice.

Overcoming psychological insulin resistance: A practical guide for healthcare professionals

Despite the demonstrated benefits of using insulin, nearly a third of the patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) are initially reluctant to initiate insulin therapy when it is first recommended by their healthcare provider (HCP). Several studies have documented the reasons for this phenomenon known as psychological insulin resistance (PIR) and also identified actionable strategies for HCPs to assist people with T2D to overcome their PIR. However, most strategies are based on the experiences of HCPs, rather than of patients. Based on findings from a study exploring real-world patient experience around HCP actions for mitigating PIR, we suggest that HCPs use collaborative strategies throughout the course of T2D treatment to 1) explore reasons for PIR, 2) help patients overcome PIR, and 3) follow-up regarding experience with insulin.

Exploring Why People With Type 2 Diabetes Do or Do Not Persist With Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Therapy: A Qualitative Study

OBJECTIVE

Despite the demonstrated benefits of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist therapy, adherence and persistence with this therapy is often challenging. The purpose of this study was to expand current understanding of patients' experiences, motivations, and challenges relevant to their persistence with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy.

DESIGN AND METHODS

This noninterventional, cross-sectional, qualitative study used face-to-face interviews with 36 adults with type 2 diabetes who had been treated with at least one GLP-1 receptor agonist medication. Inclusion criteria were: ≥18 years of age, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, and currently treated with a GLP-1 receptor agonist for ≥1 month at the time of screening ("continuers") or discontinued use of a GLP-1 receptor agonist ≤1 year of screening but with a total ≥1 month of treatment ("discontinuers"). Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured qualitative interview guide that included open-ended questions and probes to obtain both spontaneous and prompted input from participants about their current and past treatment experiences with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy.

RESULTS

Among continuers (n = 16), the most commonly identified facilitators supporting the decision to continue were the observations of improved glucose control (50%) and weight loss (55%). Among discontinuers (n = 20), the most commonly identified challenges leading to treatment discontinuation were side effects (55%) and high cost (50%). Continuers were more likely than discontinuers to receive clinically relevant information from their health care team, including facts about GLP-1 receptor agonist medications, likely treatment benefits, the importance of gradual dose titration, and the need to adjust diet after initiation.

CONCLUSION

Although cost is a major obstacle to treatment continuation, it can only be resolved through changes in ongoing reimbursement coverage and policies. However, many other obstacles could potentially be addressed (e.g., reducing side effects with gradual dosage titration and setting appropriate expectations regarding efficacy) through more collaborative patient-clinician interactions before initiating therapy.

Feasibility of a New Approach to Initiate Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Treatment inertia and prescription complexity are among reasons that people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not reach glycemic targets. This study investigated feasibility of a new approach to basal insulin initiation, where the dose needed to reach a glycemic target is estimated from two weeks of insulin and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data.

METHODS

This was an exploratory single arm study with a maximum length of 84 days. Eight insulin naïve people with T2D, planning to initiate basal insulin, wore a CGM throughout the study period. A predetermined regime was followed for the first two weeks after which the end dose was estimated. The clinician decided whether to follow this advice and continued the titration until target was reached using a twice weekly stepwise titration algorithm. The primary outcome was the comparison between the estimated and the actual end doses.

RESULTS

Median age of participants was 57 years (range: 50-77 years), duration of diabetes was 16 years (range: 5-29 years), and Bodi Mass Index (BMI) was 30.2 kg/m² (range: 22.0-36.0 kg/m²). The median study end dose was 37 U (range: 20-123 U). The estimated end dose was smaller than or equal to the study end dose in all cases, with median error of 26.7% (range: 0.0%-75.8% underestimation). No self-monitoring of blood glucose values were below 70 mg/dL and no severe hypoglycemia occurred.

CONCLUSION

While accuracy may be improved, it was found safe to predict the study end dose of insulin degludec from two weeks of data.

Persons with type 2 diabetes and high insulin persistence were associated with a lower risk of mortality: A nationwide retrospective cohort study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Studies assessing the long-term outcomes of insulin persistence are scant. We compared the risk of all-cause mortality among patients with different degrees of insulin persistence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In total, 293,210 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus undergoing insulin therapy were enrolled during 2002-2014. Insulin persistence was defined as continual insulin treatment without a 90-day gap of discontinuation in the 2-year observation period. Mortality rates were compared between 111,220 patients with ≥90% insulin persistence and 111,220 matched patients with <90% insulin persistence during the observational period.

RESULTS

During the mean 5.37-year follow-up period, the mortality rates were 58.26 and 73.21 per 1,000 person-years for patients with ≥90% and <90% of insulin persistence. The adjusted hazard ratio for mortality was 0.80 (95% confidence interval 0.79-0.81, P < 0.001). Patients with high insulin persistence had significantly lower risks than did those with low insulin persistence of death due to hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, kidney disease, respiratory disease, sepsis and cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that patients with ≥90% insulin persistence were associated with lower risks of all-cause mortality than did patients with <90% insulin persistence.

Reasons for discontinuing insulin and factors associated with insulin discontinuation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a real-world evidence study

BACKGROUND

Evidence suggests that insulin therapy of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is frequently discontinued. However, the reasons for discontinuing insulin and factors associated with insulin discontinuation in this patient population are not well understood.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of adults with T2DM prescribed insulin between 2010 and 2017 at Partners HealthCare. Reasons for discontinuing insulin and factors associated with insulin discontinuation were studied using electronic medical records (EMR) data. Natural language processing (NLP) was applied to identify reasons from unstructured clinical notes. Factors associated with insulin discontinuation were extracted from structured EMR data and evaluated using multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among 7009 study patients, 2957 (42.2%) discontinued insulin within 12 months after study entry. Most patients who discontinued insulin (2121 / 71.7%) had reasons for discontinuation documented. The most common reasons were improving blood glucose control (33.2%), achieved weight loss (18.5%) and initiation of non-insulin diabetes medications (16.7%). In multivariable analysis adjusted for demographics and comorbidities, patients were more likely to discontinue either basal or bolus insulin if they were on a basal-bolus regimen (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3 to 1.8; p <  0.001) or were being seen by an endocrinologist (OR 2.6; 95% CI 2.2 to 3.0; p <  0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large real-world evidence study conducted in an area with a high penetration of health insurance, insulin discontinuation countenanced by healthcare providers was common. In most cases it was linked to achievement of glycemic control, achieved weight loss and initiation of other diabetes medications. Factors associated with and stated reasons for insulin discontinuation were different from those previously described for non-adherence to insulin therapy, identifying it as a distinct clinical phenomenon.

Use of Insulin Degludec/Insulin Aspart in the Management of Diabetes Mellitus: Expert Panel Recommendations on Appropriate Practice Patterns

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a fixed-ratio co-formulation of insulin degludec (IDeg), which provides long-lasting basal insulin coverage, and insulin aspart (IAsp), which targets post-prandial glucose. This expert panel aimed to provide a practical and implementable guidance document to assist clinicians in prescribing IDegAsp in the diabetes management with respect to different patient populations including children and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D) as well as pregnant, elderly and hospitalized patients and varying practice patterns (insulin-naive, insulin-treated, switching from basal, basal bolus and premix regimens). The experts recommended that IDegAsp can be used in insulin-naive T2D patients with poor glycemic control (HbA1c >8.5%) despite optimal oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) as well as in insulin-treated T2D patients by switching from basal insulin, basal-bolus therapy or premixed insulins in relation to lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia, fewer injections and lower intraday glycemic variability, respectively. The experts considered the use of IDegAsp in children with T2D as a basal bolus alternative rather than as an alternative to basal insulin after metformin failure, use of IDegAsp in adult T1D patients as a simplified basal bolus regimen with lesser nocturnal hypoglycemia, fewer injections and better fasting plasma glucose control and in children with T1D as an alternative insulin regimen with fewer injection to increase treatment adherence. The proposed expert opinion provides practical information on use of IDegAsp in different patient populations and practice patterns to assist clinicians, which seems to compensate the need for easily implementable guidance on this novel insulin regimen.

Machine Learning-Based Adherence Detection of Type 2 Diabetes Patients on Once-Daily Basal Insulin Injections

BACKGROUND

Lack of treatment adherence can lead to life-threatening health complications for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Recent improvements and availability in continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology have enabled various possibilities to monitor diabetes treatment. Detection of missed once-daily basal insulin injections can be used to provide feedback to patients, thus improving their diabetes management. In this study, we explore how machine learning (ML) based on CGM data can be used for detecting adherence to once-daily basal insulin injections.

METHODS

In-silico CGM data were generated to simulate a cohort of T2D patients on once-daily insulin injection (Tresiba®). Deep learning methods within ML based on automatic feature extraction including convolutional neural networks were explored and compared with simple feature-engineered ML classification models for adherence detection. It was further investigated whether fused expert-dependent and automatically learned features could improve performance, resulting in a comparison of six different detection models. Adherence was detected throughout each day with an increasing amount of CGM data available.

RESULTS

The adherence detection accuracy improved as more CGM data became available on the day of classification. The three classification models based on expert-engineered features obtained mean accuracies of 78.6%, 78.2%, and 78.3%. The classification model based purely on learned features obtained a mean accuracy of 79.7%. The two classification models fusing expert-engineered and learned features obtained mean accuracies of 79.7% and 79.8%. All the mentioned results were obtained 16 hours after time of injection.

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that adherence detection based on CGM data is feasible. Even though our study based on in-silico data indicates only slightly improved performance of more complex models, the question remains whether advanced models would outperform the simple in a real-world setting. Thus, future studies on adherence monitoring using real CGM data are relevant.

The factors associated with insulin nonpersistence in persons with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Implementation of insulin therapy among those with diabetes is often suboptimal as a result of non-adherence or non-persistence. Studies regarding factors leading to insulin nonpersistence are limited. Therefore, we conducted this retrospective cohort study to determine the factors affecting insulin nonpersistence.

METHODS

A total of 274,852 persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus under insulin therapy during the period 2000-2014 were enrolled. Persons who stopped insulin therapy for >90 days were defined as having insulin nonpersistence. We searched for factors associated with insulin nonpersistence during the long-term follow-up period.

RESULTS

According to the multiple Cox regression model with a mean follow-up of 13.9 years, the factors associated with higher risk of insulin nonpersistence were age <40 years, men, residing in a rural area, Charlson comorbidity index score = 4, use of two or more oral antidiabetic drugs, and hypoglycemia during follow-up. The Kaplan-Meier graph showed that patients aged <40 years had significantly less insulin persistence.

CONCLUSIONS

This nationwide cohort study indicated that persons with young-onset type 2 diabetes, less medical resources, and more comorbidities are at risk of insulin nonpersistence. Healthcare providers should regularly assess insulin persistence and help patients who are having difficulty with insulin-taking.

Factors and outcomes associated with discontinuation of basal insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVES

To assess treatment discontinuation, associated factors and outcomes after initiating basal insulin (BI) among Chinese insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had previously uncontrolled hyperglycaemia on OADs.

PATIENTS

Insulin-naïve patients with T2DM who had uncontrolled hyperglycaemia (HbA1c ≥7%) by OADs and were willing to initiate BI treatment were enrolled from 209 secondary and tertiary hospitals in eight geographical regions in China.

DESIGN

Each participant was interviewed at baseline, 3 and 6 months to collect study information. Patients with at least one visit during follow-up were included in the analyses. BI discontinuation was defined by a question asking whether the patient discontinued BI therapy at 3 or 6 months. Analyses were conducted to identify baseline factors associated with BI discontinuation and to estimate the association between insulin treatment discontinuation and patients' clinical outcomes at 6 months.

RESULTS

Of 17 858 patients, 25.8% discontinued basal insulin therapy within 6 months after initiation, and nearly two-thirds doing so within the first 3 months. Among patients discontinued basal insulin, 70.2% stopped all insulin therapy; 25.9% switched to premixed insulin and 3.8% switched to bolus only. Three most common reasons for BI discontinuation reported by patients were being unwilling to persist basal insulin without specific reasons (46.8%), reducing the frequency of daily injection (23.5%) and medical affordability (15.1%). Factors significantly associated with BI discontinuation were hospital level, patient recruitment setting, age, education level, out-of-pocket ratio, BMI, diabetes duration, self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), numbers of OADs, BI type and insulin regimen. Compared with discontinuers, patients continued BI therapy had higher FPG (46.4% vs 28.8%) and HbA1c (42.3% vs 36.5%) control rate.

CONCLUSION

Among patients with T2DM who initiated BI therapy due to uncontrolled hyperglycaemia by OADs, the proportion of insulin discontinuation was high within 6 months. Further study is needed to understand the reason behind the BI discontinuation.

Decisional Balance for Insulin Injection: Scale Development and Psychometric Testing

Background

Insulin-naive patients are often reluctant to receive insulin treatment, and even insulin-treated patients frequently have poor rates of adherence to their prescribed insulin injection regimes. Assessing attitudes toward insulin injection may help in the design of interventions that improve the insulin injection behaviors of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). The concept of decisional balance has been associated with behavior in many studies and may be useful in assessing the attitude of patients with T2DM toward insulin injection. Decisional balance for insulin injection (DBII) has not been widely assessed in patients with T2DM.

Purpose

The aim of this study was to develop an insulin injection (DBII) scale that is valid for insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients and to test the psychometric characteristics of this scale based on the concept of decisional balance.

Methods

This cross-sectional study administered an 18-item DBII scale, including pro and con subscales, to 95 insulin-naive and 237 insulin-treated patients in Taiwan. The decisional balance score was calculated as the mean score of the pro subscale minus the mean score of the con subscale. Construct validity was examined using exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis; concurrent validity was assessed by examining the association between the score of the DBII scale and the stages of behavioral change and of hemoglobin A1c for, respectively, insulin-naive patients and insulin-treated patients; and reliability was assessed using internal consistency and test–retest reliability.

Results

A 13-item DBII scale supported by exploratory factor analysis and confirmatory factor analysis was developed. The stages of behavioral change and hemoglobin A1c levels were found to be significantly associated with the scores of decisional balance of the 13-item DBII scale for both insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients. The Cronbach's α ranged between .78 and .92.

Conclusions

The 13-item DBII scale is appropriately short and possesses satisfactory validity and reliability for both insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients with T2DM. Healthcare providers may use this scale as a checklist to guide clinical discussions related to insulin therapy with both insulin-naive and insulin-treated patients with T2DM across time.

Prática insulinoterápica realizada por pessoas com diabetes na Atenção Primária em Saúde

RESUMO Objetivo Analisar a insulinoterapia realizada por pessoas com diabetes na Atenção Primária em Saúde. Método Estudo transversal, descritivo e quantitativo. A coleta de dados foi realizada por meio de entrevista, utilizando-se formulário com variáveis sociodemográficas, clínicas e etapas da insulinoterapia. Foram calculadas frequências absoluta e relativa, razão de prevalência e foi usado o teste de qui-quadrado, sendo significante o p < 0,05. Resultados A amostra foi composta de 150 pacientes. A maioria era do sexo feminino (66,7%), faixa etária de 50-85 anos (79,3%) e havia analfabetos (16,7%). Destacou-se o diabetes tipo 2 (62,0%) com complicações (42,7%), em uso de hipoglicemiantes orais e insulina. Seringas/agulhas (83,1%), lancetas (85,5%), fitas reagentes (91,0%) e frascos de insulina (93,8%) foram armazenados incorretamente pela maioria. No preparo, aplicação e transporte predominou a forma correta. Resíduos foram descartados incorretamente. Na análise geral das etapas da insulinoterapia, a maioria a realizava de forma inadequada (93,3%). Variáveis sociodemográficas e clínicas não influenciaram na prática insulinoterápica, mas na análise intragrupo houve diferença significante para realização incorreta em alguns grupos. Conclusão A insulinoterapia foi realizada de forma inadequada na maioria dos casos.

Adherence to insulin therapy and associated factors among patients with diabetes mellitus in public hospitals of Central Zone of Tigray, Ethiopia, 2018: a cross-sectional study

Introduction

Adherence to insulin therapy is a critical factor for adequate control of diabetes mellitus. Despite the multiple well-known benefits of adherence to insulin therapy, poor adherence remains to be a common cause of diabetes mellitus-related complications. A better management of diabetes mellitus requires determining the level of patient adherence and identifying why non-adherence to insulin therapy occurs. Therefore, this study was designed to assess the level of adherence to insulin therapy and associated factors among diabetes mellitus patients.

Methods

The study was conducted from May 1 to July 1, 2018, using a cross-sectional study design. Interviewer-administered questionnaire was employed for data collection and systematic random sampling technique was used to select study participants. The collected data were entered using Epi data version 3.1.1 and exported to SPSS version 22 for analysis. Logistic analysis was carried out to check the level of association between adherence to insulin therapy and the independent variables with significance level of 0.05 at 95% confidence interval.

Results

273 respondents were selected with a 100% response rate. Near to one-fourth (24.2%) of the respondents were adherent to their insulin therapy. The study revealed that good knowledge of diabetes mellitus [AOR=6.51; 95% CI [1.58, 26.71], age [>30 years] [AOR=2.63; 95% CI [1.27, 5.42], knowledge regarding insulin self-injection [AOR=4.21; 95%CI [1.06,16.65], favorable attitude towards insulin injection [AOR=2.14; 95% CI [1.04,4.41], free-of-cost insulin therapy [AOR= 4.62, 95% CI [1.06,16.65], having of glucometer at home [AOR= 2.82, 95% CI [1.12,7.09], and being a member of Ethiopian diabetic association [AOR= 5.41, 95% CI [2.31,12.64] were found to significantly affect adherence to insulin therapy.

Conclusion

Nearly one-fourth of the study participants were adherent to their insulin therapy. Good knowledge and favorable attitude towards insulin injection, good knowledge regarding diabetes mellitus, being a member of the Ethiopian Diabetes Association, age greater than thirty years old, free-of-cost insulin therapy and having glucometer at home were found to be significant predictors of adherence to insulin therapy.

Injectable Antihyperglycemics: A Systematic Review and Critical Analysis of the Literature on Adherence, Persistence, and Health Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Improving real-world medication adherence to injectable antihyperglycemics in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a clinical challenge. Quantification of the level of adherence required to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in glycemic control would assist in meeting this goal. The study objective was to review the literature regarding the relationships of medication adherence and persistence with health outcomes in adult T2DM patients using injectable antihyperglycemics.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using electronic databases to identify publications over the last decade. Publications were screened against established eligibility criteria. Study data were extracted, evaluated, and used to identify strengths, limitations, and gaps in current evidence.

RESULTS

Eligibility criteria were met by 38 studies, and this report analyzed 34 studies related to glycemic control (n = 25), healthcare resource use (n = 9), and healthcare costs (n = 14). Eight of these studies examined adherence to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), including 1 study regarding adherence to GLP-1 RA or to insulin, and 1 study investigating a GLP-1 RA/insulin combination; the remaining studies involved insulin. Studies used a broad range of measures to classify adherence and persistence, and most measures were unable to reliably evaluate the complexities of patient behavior over time. Better adherence to injectable antihyperglycemic medications was generally found to be associated with improved glycemic control, although no studies attempted to identify a MCID. Although higher diabetes-related pharmacy and total healthcare costs were reported for adherent or persistent patients, these patients tended to have lower diabetes-related and all-cause medical costs.

CONCLUSION

Results of this review confirmed the effectiveness of injectable antihyperglycemic medications for glycemic control, suggesting that there are clinical and financial consequences to nonadherence. Although attempts were made to quantify the effects of nonadherence, the interpretation of study results was limited by the lack of a MCID and inadequate study design.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk, Inc., Plainsboro Township, NJ, USA. Plain language summary available for this article.

Lack of Treatment Persistence and Treatment Nonadherence as Barriers to Glycaemic Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Treatment persistence (continuing to take medication for the prescribed period) and treatment adherence (complying with the prescription in terms of drug schedules and dosage) are both important when treating chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes (T2D). They can be indicators of patient satisfaction with treatment. In T2D, the achievement of optimal outcomes requires both persistence with and adherence to prescribed therapy. Poor persistence with and adherence to T2D medication can have profound consequences for the patient, including non-achievement of glycaemic goals and an increased risk of long-term complications and mortality. Therefore, poor treatment persistence and adherence may also have economic consequences, including increased healthcare resource utilization and healthcare costs. Treatment persistence and adherence are affected by several factors, including the mode of administration, administration frequency/regimen complexity, and patient expectations. The aims of this review are as follows: to provide an overview of persistence with and adherence to different antidiabetes therapies for patients with T2D in the real-world setting; examine factors contributing to poor treatment persistence and adherence; and assess available data on the impact of poor treatment persistence and/or adherence on clinical and economic outcomes. Numerous potential targets for improving treatment persistence and/or adherence are identified, including developing less complex treatment regimens with lower pill burdens or less frequent injections, improving the convenience of drug-delivery systems, such as the use of insulin pen devices rather than the conventional vial and syringe, and developing therapies with an improved safety profile to alleviate patient fears of adverse effects, such as weight gain and risk of hypoglycaemia.Funding: Sanofi.

Associated factors that influenced persistence with basal analog insulin therapy among people with type 2 diabetes: An exploratory analysis from a UK real-world sample

AIM

Real-world effectiveness of insulin therapy is affected by poor treatment persistence, often occurring soon after initiation. An international cross-sectional survey of people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been conducted to describe reasons for non-persistence with insulin therapy.

METHODS

Responders to an online survey in 7 countries were classified as continuers (no gap of ≥7days), interrupters (interrupted therapy for ≥7days within first 6 months, then restarted), and discontinuers (terminated therapy for ≥7days within first 6 months, no restart before survey). We present the results from the United Kingdom (UK) cohort.

RESULTS

Of 942 global respondents, 131 were from the UK, having a mean age of 37years and a mean of 7years since first T2DM diagnosis. Reasons contributing to insulin continuation (n=50) were improved physical feeling (52.0%) and improved glycemic control (48.0%). Common reasons for interruption (n=50) or discontinuation (n=31), respectively were weight gain (50.0%, 48.4%) and hypoglycemia (38.0%, 25.8%). Most important reason for possible re-initiation for interrupters and discontinuers, respectively was persuasion by physician/healthcare professional (74.0%, 64.5%).

CONCLUSION

The benefits of basal insulin therapy motivated continuers to persist with the treatment; experienced or anticipated side effects contributed to interruption and discontinuation.

Development of Novel EE/Alginate Polyelectrolyte Complex Nanoparticles for Lysozyme Delivery: Physicochemical Properties and In Vitro Safety

The number of biologic drugs has increased in the pharmaceutical industry due to their high therapeutic efficacy and selectivity. As such, safe and biocompatible delivery systems to improve their stability and efficacy are needed. Here, we developed novel cationic polymethacrylate-alginate (EE-alginate) pNPs for the biologic drug model lysozyme (Lys). The impact of variables such as total charge and charge ratios over nanoparticle physicochemical properties as well as their influence over in vitro safety (viability/proliferation and cell morphology) on HeLa cells was investigated. Our results showed that electrostatic interactions between the EE-alginate and lysozyme led to the formation of EE/alginate Lys pNPs with reproducible size, high stability due to their controllable zeta potential, a high association efficiency, and an in vitro sustained Lys release. Selected formulations remained stable for up to one month and Fourier transform-Infrared (FT-IR) showed that the functional groups of different polymers remain identifiable in combined systems, suggesting that Lys secondary structure is retained after pNP synthesis. EE-alginate Lys pNPs at low concentrations are biocompatible, while at high concentrations, they show cytotoxic for HeLa cells, and this effect was found to be dose-dependent. This study highlights the potential of the EE-alginate, a novel polyelectrolyte complex nanoparticle, as an effective and viable nanocarrier for future drug delivery applications.

The Effect of Inkjet Printing over Polymeric Films as Potential Buccal Biologics Delivery Systems

The buccal mucosa appears as a promissory route for biologic drug administration, and pharmaceutical films are flexible dosage forms that can be used in the buccal mucosa as drug delivery systems for either a local or systemic effect. Recently, thin films have been used as printing substrates to manufacture these dosage forms by inkjet printing. As such, it is necessary to investigate the effects of printing biologics on films as substrates in terms of their physical and mucoadhesive properties. Here, we explored solvent casting as a conventional method with two biocompatible polymers, hydroxypropyl methylcellulose, and chitosan, and we used electrospinning process as an electrospun film fabrication of polycaprolactone fibers due to its potential to elicit mucoadhesion. Lysozyme was used as biologic drug model and was formulated as a solution for printing by thermal inkjet printing. Films were characterized before and after printing by mechanical and mucoadhesive properties, surface, and ultrastructure morphology through scanning electron microscopy and solid state properties by thermal analysis. Although minor differences were detected in micrographs and thermograms in all polymeric films tested, neither mechanical nor mucoadhesive properties were affected by these differences. Thus, biologic drug printing on films was successful without affecting their mechanical or mucoadhesive properties. These results open way to explore biologics loading on buccal films by inkjet printing, and future efforts will include further in vitro and in vivo evaluations.

Clinical and economic considerations based on persistency with a novel insulin delivery device versus conventional insulin delivery in patients with type 2 diabetes: A retrospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

Insulin is one of the most efficacious treatments for hyperglycemia; however, adherence to insulin therapy is poor, impacting its efficacy. Thus, the objectives of this study were to determine if persistent use of a new insulin delivery option, V-Go, improved clinical outcomes and secondly compare clinical and economic outcomes between persistent use of V-Go and conventional insulin delivery (CID).

METHODS

A retrospective review of an outpatient clinic's records was performed. Patients initiating V-Go with documented persistent use of V-Go or resumed persistent use of CID after short-term V-Go use were included (≥5 months of persistency). Baseline data and a total of two post-V-Go or CID initiation visits were examined for clinical and economic outcomes. Cost-effectiveness of each therapy was calculated by dividing the mean cost difference (baseline to office visit 2) by the mean change in A1c (baseline to office visit 2).

RESULTS

V-Go persistent patients had a significant decrease in A1c (-1.42; p < 0.001). Between baseline and office visit two, they required less insulin units/day and units/kg and had significantly lower A1c, insulin units/day, insulin units/kg, and 30-day insulin costs than CID patients. V-Go persistent patients had a lower incremental cost by $695.61 per 1% change in A1c compared to CID persistent patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Utilization of a new insulin delivery option resulted in improved clinical outcomes compared to CID and was more cost-effective. Clinicians and health plans should consider the use of new insulin delivery options for the management of patients with diabetes on insulin therapy to promote persistence.

HbA1c response after insulin initiation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in real life practice: Identifying distinct subgroups

AIMS

To identify subgroups of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) following distinct trajectories of HbA1c after insulin initiation and explore underlying differences in clinical characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cohort study was conducted in patients with T2DM initiating insulin in 2007-2013 with a follow-up of 2 to 4 years. Data were collected from the Groningen Initiative to Analyze Type 2 Diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) database. The primary outcome was subgroups with different trajectories of HbA1c patterns after insulin initiation, as identified by latent class growth modeling. Differences between subgroups were tested using one-way ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis or chi-square tests, where appropriate.

RESULTS

From 1459 patients, three subgroups with distinct HbA1c patterns were identified. Group 1 (8%) initially showed a moderate decrease followed by an increase in HbA1c 2 years later, despite receiving more comedication. Group 2 (84%) showed a stable decrease. Group 3 (8%) had a high initial level of HbA1c and a rapid decline within the first year, followed by a slow increase thereafter. Group 1 patients were on average 6-7 years younger than patients in groups 2 and 3 and were more likely to receive sulfonylureas than Group 3 patients. Group 3 patients had a shorter diabetes duration and were less well-controlled for HbA1c, systolic blood pressure and LDL-cholesterol at insulin initiation.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients showed a stable HbA1c response, but one out of six patients showed either a poor response, or a rapid initial response only after insulin initiation. Response patterns were associated with age, diabetes duration and risk-factor controls at the time of insulin initiation.

Level of insulin adherence among diabetes mellitus patients in Felege Hiwot Referral Hospital, Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia, 2017: a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to know the level of insulin adherence and to identify factors affecting insulin adherence among diabetes mellitus patients in Felege Hiwot Referral Hospital, Bahir Dar, Northwest Ethiopia.

RESULTS

Prevalence of insulin adherence was 59.2%. Patients who are married [AOR = 0.3 (0.14-0.7)], have regular health care visit [AOR = 3.3 (1.5-7.5)] and accessing insulin with low cost [AOR = 2.9 (1.3-6.3)] were more likely to adhere insulin therapy than their counterparts. Recommendations to increase insulin adherence were: government and non-governmental organizations, volunteers and concerned bodies should support syringe and needles for diabetes patients, health care providers and responsible bodies should give intensive health education about the effect of stopping insulin medication.

Insulin non-persistence among people with type 2 diabetes: how to get your patients to stay on insulin therapy

Continuing use of medication is key to effective treatment and positive health outcomes, particularly in chronic conditions such as diabetes. However, in primary care, non-persistence (i.e. discontinuing or interrupting treatment) with insulin therapy is a common problem among patients with type 2 diabetes. To help primary care physicians manage patients who are non-persistent or likely not to be persistent, this review aimed to provide an overview of modifiable and non-modifiable factors associated with insulin non-persistence as well as practical strategies to address them. Data were extracted from published studies evaluating factors associated with non-persistence among patients with type 2 diabetes. A targeted literature review was performed using PubMed to identify recent studies (2000-2016) reporting measures of non-persistence with insulin therapy. Practical strategies to identify and prevent non-persistence were based on the authors' direct experience in primary care. Non-modifiable factors associated with non-persistence included gender, age, prior treatments, and cost of therapy. Before/at insulin initiation, modifiable factors included patients' perception of diabetes, preference for oral medication, and concerns/expectations about treatment complexity, inconvenience, or side effects. After initiation, modifiable factors included syringe use, difficulties during the first week of therapy, side effects, and insufficient glycemic control. Open-ended and patient-centered questions and a blame-free environment can help physicians identify, prevent, and reduce non-persistence behaviors. Possible questions to start a conversation with patients are provided. Effective physician-patient communication is essential to the management of diabetes. Primary care physicians should be familiar with the most common reasons for insulin non-persistence.

Correlates of basal insulin persistence among insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: results from a multinational survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

People with T2DM who initiate basal insulin therapy often stop therapy temporarily or permanently soon after initiation. This study analyzes the reasons for and correlates of stopping and restarting basal insulin therapy among people with T2DM.

METHODS

An online survey was completed by 942 insulin-naïve adults with self-reported T2DM from Brazil, France, Germany, Japan, Spain, UK, and US. Respondents had initiated basal insulin therapy within the 3-24 months before survey participation and met criteria for one of three persistence groups: continuers had no gaps of ≥7 days in basal insulin treatment; interrupters had at least one gap in insulin therapy of ≥7 days within the first 6 months after initiation and had since restarted basal insulin; and discontinuers stopped using basal insulin within the first 6 months after initiation and had not restarted.

RESULTS

Physician recommendations and cost were strongly implicated in patients stopping and not resuming insulin therapy. Continuous persistence was lower for patients with more worries about insulin initiation, greater difficulties and weight gain while using insulin, and higher for those using pens and perceiving their diabetes as severe. Repeated interruption of insulin therapy was associated with hyperglycemia and treatment burden while using insulin. Resumption and perceived likelihood of resumption were associated with hyperglycemia upon insulin cessation. Perceived likelihood of resumption among discontinuers was associated with perceived benefits of insulin.

CONCLUSION

Better understanding of the risk factors for patient cessation and resumption of basal insulin therapy may help healthcare providers improve persistence with therapy.

Basal insulin initiation use and experience among people with type 2 diabetes mellitus with different patterns of persistence: results from a multi-national survey

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

People with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often interrupt basal insulin treatment soon after initiation. This study aimed to describe the experiences during and after basal insulin initiation among people with T2DM with different persistence patterns.

METHODS

Adults with T2DM from France, Germany, Spain, UK, US, Brazil, and Japan were identified from consumer panels for an online survey. Respondents who initiated basal insulin 3-24 months prior to survey date were categorized as continuers (no gaps of ≥7 days in insulin treatment); interrupters (first gap ≥7 days within 6 months of initiation and restarted insulin); and discontinuers (stopped insulin for ≥7 days within 6 months of initiation without restarting).

RESULTS

Among 942 participants, continuers were older than interrupters and discontinuers (46, 37, and 38 years, respectively, p < .01). Continuers reported having fewer concerns before and after insulin initiation than interrupters and discontinuers, while interrupters had the most concerns. Continuers also reported fewer challenges during the first week of insulin use. Continuers were more likely to respond that insulin use had a positive impact on specific aspects of life than interrupters and discontinuers, for example on glycemic control (73.0%, 63.0%, and 61.8%, respectively; p < .01 vs. continuers).

CONCLUSION

Among people with T2DM with different persistence patterns after basal insulin initiation there were significant differences in patient characteristics and experience during and after insulin initiation. Interrupters and discontinuers more frequently reported having concerns and challenges during the initiation process, negative impacts after initiation, and less improvement in glycemic control than continuers.

Hypoglycemia Risk Related to Double Dose Is Markedly Reduced with Basal Insulin Peglispro Versus Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in a Randomized Trial: IMAGINE 8

BACKGROUND

Basal insulin peglispro (BIL) has a peripheral-to-hepatic distribution of action that resembles endogenous insulin and a prolonged duration of action with a flat pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile at steady state, characteristics that tend to reduce hypoglycemia risk compared to insulin glargine (GL). The primary objective was to demonstrate that clinically significant hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤54 mg/dL [3.0 mmol/L] or symptoms of severe hypoglycemia) occurred less frequently within 84 h after a double dose (DD) of BIL than a DD of GL.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blind, two-period crossover study in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) previously treated with insulin (N = 68). For the first 3 weeks of each of the two crossover periods, patients received an individualized dose of BIL or GL once nightly (stable dose for 2 weeks/period). Then, during a 7-day inpatient stay with frequent blood glucose monitoring and standardized meals, one DD of study insulin was given. Glucose was infused if blood glucose was ≤54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or for symptoms of severe hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

Within 84 h after the DD, a significantly smaller proportion of patients experienced clinically significant hypoglycemia with BIL compared to GL (BIL, 6.6%; GL, 35.5%; odds ratio for BIL/GL 0.13 [95% confidence interval 0.04-0.39]; P < 0.001). Adverse event profiles were similar for the two insulins. Serum alanine aminotransferase and triglyceride levels were significantly higher with BIL versus GL.

CONCLUSIONS

BIL has a markedly lower risk of hypoglycemia than GL when replicating a double-dose error in patients with T2D.

Combination therapies in the management of type 2 diabetes: the use of insulin degludec/liraglutide

The global burden of type 2 diabetes is estimated to currently affect over 350 million people worldwide and is anticipated to continue increasing over the next 20 years. Current treatment guidelines recommend the choice of pharmacotherapy based upon patient-specific parameters, with combination therapy for patients with a hemoglobin A1c level ≥9%. A new combination therapy of insulin degludec + liraglutide provides a long-acting basal insulin with a glucagon-like peptide agonist. In clinical trials, this combination product has reduced hemoglobin A1c and fasting plasma glucose more than the individual agents alone. Further advantages observed with this combination include weight loss and decrease in hypoglycemia compared to basal insulin alone.

Impact of telephonic interviews on persistence and daily adherence to insulin treatment in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes patients: dropout study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to evaluate the impact of sequential telephonic interviews on treatment persistence and daily adherence to insulin injections among insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes patients initiated on different insulin regimens in a 3-month period.

METHODS

A total of 1,456 insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (mean [standard deviation, SD] age: 56.0 [12.0] years, 49.1% were females) initiated on insulin therapy and consecutively randomized to sequential (n=733) and single (n=723) telephonic interview groups were included. Data on insulin treatment and self-reported blood glucose values were obtained via telephone interview. Logistic regression analysis was performed for factors predicting increased likelihood of persistence and skipping an injection.

RESULTS

Overall, 76.8% patients (83.2% in sequential vs 70.3% in single interview group, (P<0.001) remained on insulin treatment at the third month. Significantly higher rate for skipping doses was noted in basal bolus than in other regimens (27.0% vs 15.0% for premixed and 15.8% basal insulin, respectively, P<0.0001). Logistic regression analysis revealed sequential telephonic interview (odds ratio [OR], 1.531; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.093-2.143; P=0.013), higher hemoglobin A1c levels (OR, 1.090; 95% CI, 0.999-1.189; P=0.049), and less negative appraisal of insulin therapy as significant predictors of higher persistence. Basal bolus regimen (OR, 1.583; 95% CI, 1.011-2.479; P=0.045) and higher hemoglobin A1c levels (OR, 1.114; 95% CI, 1.028-1.207; P=0.008) were the significant predictors of increased likelihood of skipping an injection.

CONCLUSION

Our findings revealed positive influence of sequential telephonic interview, although including no intervention in treatment, on achieving better treatment persistence in type 2 diabetes patients initiating insulin.